Tuesday 18 February 2020

Notes on House Bill No. 78: Another way of giving up patrimonies for pieces of silver

Notes on House Bill No. 78: Another way of giving up patrimonies for pieces of silver


For sure those who favour an "open economy" even at the expense of national sovereignty rejoices as the House of Representatives agrees in full foreign ownership in utilities especially those of Power Generation, Transportation, and Communications.

For basing from the decision of the congress allowing foreigners to have full ownership in utilities and transport, one would say that a portion of national patrimony is been denationalised in the name of private interest.

And it may sound usual, for like the suggestions given by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank would say that the House Bill wanted to remove restrictions on foreign ownership when it comes to utilities and transport, regardless of its consequences such as making Filipinos being at the mercy of foreign firms.

Ironically, the creator of House Bill No. 78 and Chairwoman of House Committee on Economic Affairs Sharon Garin, was also the creator of House Bill No. 300 that allowed foreign professionals to work in the country. Sounds neoliberal isn't she? What more that when apologists would share her statements like "gaining fresh perspective", "new knowledge", "broadening skill", "competition", even at the expense of domestic knowledge and enterprise.

And to think that Garin herself comes from a partylist that represented "marginalised farmers", is she using a group of marginalised farmers for neoliberal goals? Wouldn't be surprised if agrarian reform is been disposed in favor of letting multinationals take over agriculture at the expense of smallholders, of multinational companies over small-and-medium enterprises, an unfettered kind of capitalism apologists would say "has no boundaries."

Also to think how odd that from these people, in being awed by foreign capital as a panacea for economic problems are as if these as less self-interested and profit-seeking than those of its domestic counterparts. That investors like Newscorp's Rupert Murdoch, Hormel's James Snee, and others within the multinational-transnational corporate scene enter without any restriction with apologists praising "that they will beat oligarchs two and fro without the state"; well in that case, are they sure they won't do anything in their power to make as much profits to send in their respective headquarters abroad?

Well, it doesn't matter for them that the biggest chunk of their profits goes to their respective home countries. One apologist however, "attempts" to "resolve" the problem by telling that the state must act as a supervisor "with regulatory powers" and with the privilege to take over "in times of national emergency". This idea would say that the state has a semblance of being an intervenor despite the obvious selling out of utilities to foreigners-"To ensure compliance of Philippine economic laws and regulations that there will be no monopoly or oligopoly" as the justification says, while its actual practise would be far from its statement.

But despite their justifications come to think of this: that by replacing a domestic oligarch with those of a foreigner is all but "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" kind of scenario, and "They didn't become as big as they are by playing nice" as the saying goes. And because of that, can and how the people able to stop utilities, transport, and telecommunications companies from being more expensive and inaccessible than they should be especially under foreign control? It may end as same as the domestic oligarchs do if that's the case, excerting even more economic and even political influence through concessions and all.

And since utilities, transport, and telecoms be at the hands of these foreigners, what would be next? Agriculture? Media? Construction activities? For sure even education institutions may also end at the hands of foreigners with apologists claiming about "opening the economy" as the bestest way to improve the country's economy even at the expense of domestic enterprise. As other countries demand a return to protecting their patrimonies and focus on domestic development, the Philippines that's still under the hands of domestic oligarchs, corrupt bureaucrats, and multinational conglomerates ever continuing its neoliberal policies rather aggravates its continuing past problems.